14 comments:

Yes. It's a far-from-perfect film, but, curiously, that makes me like it even more than if it had all of the flaws ironed out. There's something endearing about Anderson's ramshackle vision, with wobbly pans and old-fashioned zooms. Even the episodic and cartoony script works in the film's favor, giving the whole enterprise a sense of existing just one step above our own reality. Good performances, funny small-scale physical humor, and the usual melancholy that gives his films necessary gravity.

I have a feeling I might end up liking Darjeeling more than Tennenbaums, which I haven't yet seen. But we'll see. I do have a history of being drawn to what the general critical view holds to be the weaker entries in an artist's catalog. Which I'd swear is not me merely being perverse, although I know that's the popular assumption.

Yeah... Knowing you, you'll like Darjeeling better.. It's got components in it that hit closer to home for you.. Tennenbaums I used to love, but in hindsight it's pretty fucking hokey and dated.. plus it came out during the worst part of my life so for that alone it's completely tainted..

You and I discussed this at one point, but I forgot to mention here that I did like Life Aquatic - it was, in fact, a real eye-opener for me in the whole New Wave, which I thought I'd hated. Turns out I only hate the films of Paul Thomas Anderson, who was really held up as being the vanguard of that movement. But the other directors in the movement - Wes Anderson, David Russell and Sofia Coppola (and others) all turn out to be on my wavelength.

And I loooooove Linklater, but he predates the movement by a few years.

But PTA is a lot like Kubrick and Lynch - a master of cinematic language who erects perfectly constructed cathedrals of film, without a single character or plot point I care about. Maybe PTA should get around to making a science-fiction movie, where his detached direction and obvious allegories will finally meet his visual eye.

Did you guys go to film school?Cuz I did. And this thread is filled with crazy talk!Anyway, believe it or not, I "directed" one of the dvd extras of life aquatic...the cheesy talkshow segment was done in my studio. I designed the set, lit it, switched it, and came up with the concept of the "unseen interpreter"...funny thing: I haven't seen it yet. Let me know how it is won't you?

Yikes.Wasn't for a second implying anything about my way being the only correct way of thinking. I don't believe I even elaborated as far as what *my way* of thinking was, so not sure where that came from...

I was simply admiring what seemed to be the opposite of the crud I had to sit through in school - a weekly, stuffy, self-indulgent critique session that given its typical course and velocity might as well have turned into "Batman can beat up Superman" declarations...but substitute Batman and Superman with Stan Brakhage and Jonas Mekas. (Yes I went to "art film" school, so I guess I'm rendered totally irrelevant.)Anyway...So go on with your bad self, vis a vis your bad self.

Ah, comments pages are the new bar arguments. You need to offer to buy each other a round, now.

I totally sympathize with your film school agonies, btw. The technical knowledge and influences you gain in art school are invaluable, but the danger of becoming a total neurotic about the thing you love uncritically and want most to be in the world is high.